memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Alternate reality counterparts
I figure it might be useful to have a full list of original timeline characters which have an alternate reality counterpart somewhere. These would include the obvious, like James T. Kirk vs James T. Kirk (alternate reality), but go all the way to the more obscure ones like the alternate , or . It's particularly the latter that I think would shine on this list: these counterparts make for some very interesting trivia, but right now they're not all that easy to find (except by scouring the alternate reality people categories). Maybe pictures could even be included for comparison, though that's just a thought. Also I suppose there would be a background section for on-screen characters only shown to be counterparts in licensed material, which happens occasionally (for example Zahra). I want to stress that since there have been a few heated debates about if a character is a counterpart or not, this would have to be very strictly limited to confirmed counterparts, it can't be a nest of speculation. Finally, if this is successful, maybe in time it might make sense to have a second such list for the Mirror Universe. I imagine this list would be too long to simply put in a section at Alternate reality, so I'm thinking maybe having it as a page called "Alternate reality counterparts" or something. Anyone else think this is a good idea, or maybe a bad one? Or any other thoughts? -- Capricorn (talk) 00:01, December 11, 2016 (UTC) :I would suggest creating this as a subpage first, to at least see if it's managable as a in-universe article at all. - 05:34, December 11, 2016 (UTC) Great idea, I will work on that. In the meantime, what are your manageability-concerns exactly? -- Capricorn (talk) 06:28, December 11, 2016 (UTC) ::I like this too. There's also the licensed material mirror universe counterparts of alternate characters, not to mention their gender-opposite counterparts, which I've included in apocrypha. --LauraCC (talk) 18:57, December 11, 2016 (UTC) Here's some mock-up stuff. I think the table with comparison pictures looks quite nice (could probably be better if only I had some table-making talent though). But looking at the bare-bones list, it is probably short enough to just add to the alternate reality page as a section - especially if it could be spread over two columns. -- Capricorn (talk) 19:49, December 11, 2016 (UTC) :Since doppelgänger is essentially the "top" page for these types of lists, I'm wondering how this would tie into that; if you were going for something like mirror universe inhabitants, or something else. The images are actually my biggest problem, since that's inviting readers to compare and contrast different actors portraying the same character. I know the prime and alt people are "different" characters, but they are suppose to be the "same" people too. - 20:20, December 11, 2016 (UTC) Different people with the same genome, I guess. I would just place a section with a link at Doppelgänger much the same way the Mirror universe inhabitants are done, although the placement of the latter there never made much sense to me, it's just a list of all mirror universe inhabitants regardless if we have proof of a counterpart. I actually think that that link would be more suitably placed in a see also section, whereas my proposed list is a more correct model for what a Doppelgänger subpage ought to contain. The photos were meant as a kind of covert feature, I suppose. Us comparing appearances would be nitpicking, but people are going to be interested in doing it anyway, and simply illustrating a list is a perfectly reasonable thing to do that without us engaging in such things coincidentally allows the user to indulge their curiosity in an easy way. I personally don't particularly see anything wrong with that, but I can certainly understand if someone would disagree. But really, in my thinking about it I'm moving away from the separate page with an elaborate table with pictures myself, I now think it would be more natural as a section with a list of the Alternate reality page. A bit like the lists of landmarks that we have on the pages for some of the more developed planets in feel. -- Capricorn (talk) 22:28, December 11, 2016 (UTC) There's been no more comment. Archduk3, I'd like to put the list up, as a section on alternate reality, unless you have still have an objection at this point. -- Capricorn (talk) 17:15, December 20, 2016 (UTC) :I'm of the opinion that if this isn't going to be its own list page then it doesn't really need to exist at all, since it will quickly "overwhelm" the content at AR and has an easily over-expandable and abusable scope if not "locked in" with something a little harder to change than a section header. On top of that, I think properly categorizing the AR pages instead of more or less duplicating those categories in list form just to add pictures is a better use of our time. That said, actually creating this will likely draw enough attention to settle these matters either way. - 21:37, December 20, 2016 (UTC) Thanks to your earlier feedback I'm not really thinking about pictures or anything anymore, just as basic a list as possible. That bare bones approach is also why I think it fits more naturally at the AR page, wouldn't be that much of a page. My current thinking is also to put it in the background section and make it as clearly clearly real-world as possible to sidestep pov issues. (pov is why I think categorization wouldn't be the best idea for this) I take your last line to suggest that I should just be bold (hope I'm not misunderstanding that). I'm not convinced that it has as much potential for cancerous development as you suggest, but hopefully if people find it problematic it will indeed attract attention. And then it can easily enough be split of, turned in a category, even removed again if that's what is to be. So I'm going to go ahead for now, and just see how it turns out. It ought to appear here shortly. -- Capricorn (talk) 15:18, December 24, 2016 (UTC) ::Great list, but the two columns kind of run together when you try to read it. A table format might be a good idea. There's nothing to naturally draw the eye from one side to the other, like a series of dashes, for instance, would. --LauraCC (talk) 15:43, December 24, 2016 (UTC) I'm horrible at that list/table kind of stuff, whatever I design in html looks like crap. Would it be too lazy of me to suggest that maybe you try tweaking it to be more to your liking? -- Capricorn (talk) 21:28, December 24, 2016 (UTC) ::I mostly find something I like somewhere else and tweak it to suit me. That's what I did for the table of "names and known meanings" at Name. --LauraCC (talk) 16:38, December 29, 2016 (UTC) Yeah me too, but something goes wrong in the tweaking. -- Capricorn (talk) 01:00, December 30, 2016 (UTC) ::Submitted for your approval (before I replace your formatting) :: :Well, I was hoping for it to look like a heavy fancy table as little as possible, but still, there's no denying this looks way better. I'll put it in. Well, minus the title thing which is beautiful but doesn't seem to fit in the normal style. -- Capricorn (talk) 02:39, December 31, 2016 (UTC) ::: So we're still up in the air on Chandra? --Alan del Beccio (talk) 02:48, December 31, 2016 (UTC) :I'm not. - 08:33, December 31, 2016 (UTC) ::At least the words are separated visually by something. It's much cleaner and easier to read, IMHO. LOL. --LauraCC (talk) 14:40, December 31, 2016 (UTC)